Site Search
Professionals 386 results
Capabilities 64 results
Practice Area
Trial skills matter—even in a world where few disputes ever see the inside of a courtroom. Winston has built a reputation as a trial lawyers’ firm, featuring seasoned litigators who leverage extensive courtroom experience to meet our clients’ business and legal objectives. Our long history of taking cases to trial—and winning—provides our clients with tremendous settlement leverage with their adversaries, as well as a substantial likelihood of a favorable resolution if, and when, they go to trial.
Practice Area
Our nationally recognized Appellate & Critical Motions (ACM) Practice delivers sophisticated legal advocacy and analysis before trial, at trial, and on appeal. From state trial courts to the U.S. Supreme Court, our ACM attorneys identify, preserve, and present the critical legal issues that can make the difference between winning and losing.
Practice Area
Our Patent Litigation Practice is one of the country’s most active and highly regarded. Our seasoned patent litigators bring extensive courtroom experience to every matter we handle. According to Lex Machina, we are among the top three national patent defense firms in the country for number of appearances and cases filed, and we also were the top national defense firm for number of patent trials in the last five years (2018–2022).
Experience 30 results
Experience
|March 31, 2025
After an eleven-day bench trial in January 2023, the N.D. Ill. delivered a full defense verdict in March 2025 in an ERISA class action brought by participants in Segerdahl Corporation’s ESOP. The court rejected the class claims against Segerdahl, its ESOP trustee GreatBanc Trust Company, and various individual defendants including board members Bob Cronin, Rod Goldstein, and Peter Mason, alleging that Segerdahl could have sold for a significantly higher price, which would have increased post-sale distributions to the ESOP participants. Winston earned an Am Law Litigator of the Week Shout Out for this win.
Experience
|March 18, 2025
Winston Blunts Earnout Payment
Following a bench trial in Fall 2024, a New York trial court ruled in March 2025 that Cresco Labs, Inc. was not required to pay a US$45M earnout under a merger agreement. The court found that Cresco did not receive “commercially reasonable access” to New York’s adult-use cannabis market, which was supposed to be subject only to a non-competitive application or approval process. Adopting Cresco’s arguments, the court determined that only the Office of Cannabis Management and Cannabis Control Board could decide when and how applicants access the adult-use market. The court agreed that regulators required Cresco to pay a significant one-time fee, prioritized other applicants, and had broad discretion over approvals. This win supports claims that New York’s adult-use program lacks details and clear entry paths, frustrating industry leaders’ efforts to develop a robust adult-use market.
Experience
|January 31, 2025
Winston Secures Complete Defense Judgment for Alphatec in Prolonged Litigation Battle
In a long-running, bitter dispute between fierce competitors, Winston obtained a complete defense judgment on January 31, 2025, for its client Alphatec Holdings, along with its Chairman and CEO Pat Miles, following a week-long bench trial in the Delaware Chancery Court in early October 2023 over allegations of breach of fiduciary duty and violation of alleged non-competition covenants. Following additional post-trial briefing and oral argument, the court, on January 31, 2025, found in favor of Winston’s clients in all respects. The January 31, 2025, defense judgment marked the third favorable trial outcome obtained by Winston for Alphatec in a series of lawsuits filed by NuVasive—seeking, collectively, damages totaling nearly US$200M—dating back to October 2017.
Insights & News 2,094 results
Product Liability & Mass Torts Digest
|September 17, 2025
|4 Min Read
Supreme Court To Settle if All’s Well That Ends Well in Diversity Jurisdiction
The Supreme Court has granted certiorari in Hain Celestial Group, Inc. v. Palmquist to determine whether a final order issued by a federal court may stand if an appellate court later determines the district court erred in dismissing a nondiverse defendant and denying a motion to remand.
Recognitions
|September 17, 2025
|1 Min Read
Winston Partners Named to Forbes’ 2025 America’s Top Lawyers List
Winston & Strawn partners have been recognized on Forbes’ 2025 America’s Top Lawyers list. This accolade highlights lawyers who have distinguished themselves through notable deals and transactions, impressive trial work, wise counsel, and respect from colleagues and clients.
Recognitions
|September 11, 2025
|Less Than 1 Min Read
Winston Patent Litigation Practice and Attorneys Ranked in Patexia’s 2025 PTAB Intelligence Report
Winston & Strawn’s Patent Litigation Practice was recognized among the top 25 Law Firms in Patexia’s 2025 PTAB Intelligence Report. Each year, the report provides a comprehensive analysis of the past five years of patent litigation activity, reviewing over 6,800 PTAB proceedings, 5,000 patents, 5,600 attorneys, and 800 law firms.
Other Results 32 results
Law Glossary
What Is the Patent Trial and Appeal Board?
The Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) is a tribunal within U.S. Patent and Trademark Office. The PTAB oversees trial proceedings, namely: inter partes review (IPR), post-grant review (PGR), covered business method (CBM) review, and derivation proceedings. The Board also hears appeals from adverse patentability decisions by patent examiners in original applications, reissues, and reexaminations. And, while phasing out since the passage of the America Invents Act (AIA) in 2011, the PTAB is also responsible for deciding interferences. The PTAB was previously referred to as the Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences and was renamed by the AIA.
Law Glossary
What Is an Inter Partes Review (IPR)?
An inter partes review of a patent is a type of administrative trial proceeding. Inter partes review became available in 2012 and replaced inter partes reexamination as a way to challenge patentability at the Patent Office. Any person who is not the owner of a patent can file a petition for a review of a patent. The Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) will act on the petition either instituting a trial or denying institution of a trial. This will occur a little over six months after the petition is filed. If trial is instituted, the proceeding will, with some limited exceptions, be resolved within one year.
Site Content
What Is a Temporary Restraining Order (TRO)?
A temporary restraining order (TRO) is a legal document issued by a judge before trial that forces or prevents an action for a specified time frame. During court cases that involve trademark infringement or the use of a trade secret, a TRO can halt patent, copyright, or trademark infringement in the short term. It can offer relief in various situations, such as to prevent the sharing of a business secret or an unfair competition practice, until a court hearing on a preliminary injunction can be held. A TRO petition is an emergency request for a state or federal court to take immediate action based on submitted evidence.